You are currently not authorized to access this section.
Please contact your Administrator to change your authorization settings.
OFCCP: Ask the Experts
OFCCP Ask the Experts
OFFICE OF FEDERAL CONTRACT COMPLIANCE PROGRAMS
Ask the Experts is an online forum where federal contractors and subcontractors are invited to submit questions to industry experts related to OFCCP compliance, affirmative action planning, and equal employment opportunity. Simply register your company on LocalJobNetwork.com to submit a question.
Are there any vulnerabilities with the following practice for when multiple quantities of the same position are needed:
Opening and posting one (1) requisition that has five (5) openings. Once five candidates have been identified from this candidate pool, opening four other additional requisitions, duplicating the candidate pool from the initial req in these additional reqs, and then dispositioning one of the five initially identified candidates into each newly created req as "hire."
Answered by Lisa Kaiser from The Kaiser Law Group, PLLC - Aug 08, 2017
A company may hire more than one individual from a requisition. Four new requisitions need not be created for OFCCP compliance. It is a good thing to establish what will happen up front as you have done. The appropriate analyses are to compare those that competed for a position (depending on how the company does its hiring) against each other. Therefore, since there were five hires from the pool, those applicants should be used in any comparative analyses versus conducting analyses by requisition. There is nothing inherently wrong or dangerous of the practice outlined above, but it may impact how the analyses should be done (by applicant pool versus using a requisition system). Make sure to run your annual analyses using the method that captures the appropriate pool (i.e., analyses by requisition or using a combined pool). If you have very large numbers (a high turnover in jobs for example), a statistical result sometimes appears simply because of the large numbers. Foregoing a proper requisition practice could require the company to analyze a larger pool.
Single Requisition with Multiple Hires
Asked by Anonymous - Aug 08, 2017
How are single reqs with multiple hires scrutinized by the OFCCP? For instance, instead of opening five requisitions with the same title, level, requirements, etc. opening only one req with five openings? The latter options would obviously help with recruiter load and help streamline the hiring process but does potentially enlarge the candidate pool and/or is looked unfavorably the OFCCP in an audit?
OFCCP is perfectly happy to have large applicant pools where multiple candidates are hired into an applicant pool. It increases the chances there will be some kind of disparity involving members of a protected classification, which is one of the things that OFCCP seeks during compliance reviews.
There is no OFCCP rule that says companies can't hire multiple candidates into one requisition. Thus, in your example above, you can hire five individuals into the same requisition. However, good practice says that if you're going to hire more than one individual into a requisition, the qualifications for each position should be exactly the same, and all candidates hired into the requisition must meet the qualifications associated with that requisition. In your example, you indicate that individuals would be hired into the same title and level with the same requirements. Thus, hiring multiple people into this requisition may make sense. However, be aware that if you have four persons hired into exactly the same position and a fifth person who is hired into a slightly different position, you may need to spend many hours justifying why the fifth individual was hired into a different position.
In considering whether to hire multiple people into one requisition, there are factors other than the ones you name above that may be important to consider. One of these factors is timing. If you recruit and hire three people in winter, and then recruit and hire two more individuals in fall, you may effectively have two separate applicant pools. Location is also important. If you have five of the exact same openings, but two are in Dallas and three are in Boston, you may effectively have two separate applicant pools. There are other factors that may affect whether your applicant pools are, in fact, identical for your openings within a requisition.
I hope this is helpful. Best of luck with your openings.
Verbal Expression of Interest - Internet Applicant Rule
Asked by Anonymous - Aug 08, 2017
If a candidate applies to a requisition, is not qualified but expresses interest in a different open requisition, would their verbal expression of interest be enough for the recruiter to consider for the second requisition? That is, would a recruiter not have to ask the candidate to apply to the second requisition if they verbally expressed interest and how does this affect their status under the internet applicant rule?
Your company has the right to make the decision that candidates may verbally express interest in an open position. It is not a best practice for the reasons noted below, but there is nothing in OFCCP's Internet Applicant rule or any other part of the federal affirmative action regulations that prevents a company from having candidates make a verbal expression of interest.
Among the reasons that allowing a verbal expression of interest is not a best practice are the following:
-A verbal expression of interest may violate your standard practice (and perhaps your standard requirement) that in order to receive consideration, a candidate must make written application. Most companies now do, in fact, have such a requirement. By allowing one candidate to receive consideration after violating such a requirement, OFCCP may be suspicious of any requirements you put in place to limit the number of candidates who receive consideration. OFCCP would certainly be suspicious of any attempt by your company to say that candidates must apply through a defined process to receive consideration if you allow undefined exceptions to that process. -A verbal expression of interest will likely require your recruiter to move the candidate's credentials from one requisition to another. We very strongly discourage organizations from having recruiters move a candidate's credentials between requisitions. It muddies the issue of who applied for particular requisitions and it potentially makes large pools of candidates who expressed interest in one requisition into viable candidates for the second requisition. In this situation, there IS an expression of interest, so your company could argue it is valid to move the candidate's credentials between requisitions. However, it may be difficult to PROVE to OFCCP why this particular candidate's credentials were moved unless you have written documentation about the verbal expression of interest. -It's going to be difficult to explain to OFCCP what constitutes an appropriate verbal expression of interest. The situation is easier if a candidate says "I'm glad to be considered for the opening where I formally expressed interest, but I saw a separate requisition and I'd also like to be considered for that." However, what happens with the candidate who says "I'm glad to be considered for this job, and I'd like to be considered for this kind of opening in the future"? What happens with the candidate who says "I'm glad to be considered for this job, and I'd like to be considered for similar jobs in the future?" Your company has the right to define what would constitute an appropriate verbal expression of interest, but it may be difficult to create such a definition.
Frankly, it's just simpler to tell the candidate who verbally expressed interest to use your open position to use your regular process to express interest in the second opening. This saves you from the multiple headaches associated with showing that your company (a) allows appropriate verbal expressions of interest from candidates within all protected classifications and (b) clearly defines which candidates properly expressed interest in open positions including the candidates who verbally expressed interest.
Asked by Anonymous - Aug 02, 2017
We are updating our EEO Tagline and wanted to confirm this abbreviated version works for our publications with limited space: EOE/AA Employer/Vets/disabilities
That would work. It meets the requirements in the Executive Order 11246 regulations as well as the requirements in the regulations regarding protected veterans and individuals with disabilities.
Jurisdictional Thresholds determinations
Asked by Debbie M. - Jul 27, 2017
I am curious as to the language used to determine if your company is a Federal Contractor. For AAP Coverage under EO11246 it states you are if you have 50+ employees + "A" contract of $50,000 or more. Same for Disability Section 503 and VEVRAA. What if you have several contracts that add up to $50,000 or greater (similarly $150,000)? Is this specific to one contract or the dollar amount of the combination of all Federal contracts?
The guidance from OFCCP specifies a single contract of $50,000 or more as the threshold for developing a written Affirmative Action Program to comply with E.O. 11246:
“If a company has at least 50 employees and a single contract of $50,000 or more, then it must also develop an Affirmative Action Program (AAP), as described at 41 CFR 60–2. Companies whose sole coverage comes from construction contracts or federally assisted construction contracts are not required to develop an AAP, but they must comply with 16 specific affirmative actions outlined in the equal opportunity construction contract clause.”
The same is true for Section 503 and VEVRAA compliance, except the contract threshold is higher for VEVRAA.
“If the company has at least 50 employees and a single contract of $50,000 or more, then it must also develop a Section 503 AAP, as described in 41 CFR 60–741, Subpart C. Section 503 applies to businesses with federal construction contracts, but not to businesses with federally assisted construction contracts.”
“If the company has at least 50 employees and a single contract of $150,000 or more, then it must also develop a VEVRAA AAP, as described in 41 CFR 60–300, Subpart C. VEVRAA applies to businesses with federal construction contracts, but not to businesses with federally assisted construction contracts.”
Note, however, that this is not the threshold that determines if a company is a federal contractor. This is just the threshold that will require a federal contractor to develop a written AAP. You are still a covered contractor subject to the nondiscrimination and affirmative action requirements enforced by OFCCP if you fall under the following:
• E.O. 11246: Any number of employees and federal contracts (including federally assisted construction contracts) totaling more than $10,000 • Section 503: Any number of employees and a federal contract of more than $15,000 • VEVRAA: Any number of employees and a federal contract of $150,000 or more
Part of the OFCCP compliance is notifying our vendors and suppliers of our AAP status and letting them know they must comply as well with it.
Do you know what the best way is to determine who truly should be notified? We have tons of vendors and suppliers some of which are like Amazon, Staples, etc. that I don’t think this would really apply to.
Answered by Lisa Kaiser from The Kaiser Law Group, PLLC - Aug 02, 2017
This is an excellent question. OFCCP jurisdiction with regard to subcontracts, vendors, etc. is very confusing often both within and outside of the agency. The core question is whether the contract or agreement is in furtherance of the federal work. If a company provides widgets and a third party vendor supplies the components, then that vendor is likely a subcontractor. If a third party vendor supplies new office furniture, that supplier is not likely a subcontractor and would not need to be notified. The same if you purchase new paper shredders or something like that from Amazon or Staples, for example. When in doubt, it is usually a good practice to include that language. Sec. 60-1.4 equal opportunity clause, requires language in "each of its Government contracts." The laws protecting individuals with disabilities and veterans have similar language.
This forum provides information of a general nature. None of the answers or information provided is intended as legal advice or opinion relative to specific matters, facts, situations, or issues. Additional facts and information or future developments may affect the subjects addressed. You should consult with an attorney about your specific circumstance before acting on any of this information since it may not be applicable to your situation. The Local JobNetwork™ and all experts expressly disclaim all liability with respect to actions taken or not taken based on any or all of the contents of this forum.